cc vs mx5

[chase]

i am looking for some advice. we have ordered a cc (our dealer assures us that our deposit is fully refundable) but have since heard about the possible problems with the cc. we've been considering the mx5 as well (great to drive, but less practical - my wife can't lift the roof up from a sitting position!). has anyone had any experience with these 2 cars or been thru' the same dilemma? ??:

[Frosty]

I've had experience with the MX-5 and I'd have to say you're comparing apples with oranges. hard to make comparison between cars that are very very different in what they set out to provide.

After owning my CC for a week I'm thrilled to bits. Build quality is excellent, no leaks - can't fault it except for the stereo which needs a little beefing up.

Re the problems. Every car has them, and one tends to get a distorted perspective becuase you only hear about the problems and not the happy owners. I've been working very closley with Paugeot Australia and assure you they stand behind the CC with warranty. Also note that build quality has improved since itwas launched in Europe about 1.5 years ago. Mine's a Dec 2001 build and as I said I can't fault it.

I recommend you focus on the quality of your dealer and their service/maintenance team. I'm in Melbourne and have to say you'd be hard pressed to top Straightway at Mentone.

[1980s_boy]

Like Frosty, I've had my CC for just over 1 week. My only experience with an MX5 was a 1999 model which I drove for 2 weeks while a friend was overseas.

I agree with Frosty on the apples/oranges camparo, but both cars being ~$40K convertibles, I think the comparisons are natural. When I went looking for a new car (around 1 January this year), I started off looking at the 307's. My aunty has a 206 (XT I think), so I decided to look at them as well. When I saw the CC, that was it. "307, what 307 ?"

Strange thing was, I would never consider an MX5 as a new car option, even though I had lived with one before. The 3 things that sold me on the CC were:

- Solid roof. I know 3 people with MX5's. 2 of them have had their roofs slashed.
- Boot space.
- Not having that "ass dragging on the ground" feeling.

I think the MX5 would be good for me as a "2nd" car, if I had a "sensible" 1st car. The CC can be used as an everyday car without having to worry about what to do if you need to bring home more than 2 bags of shopping.

Another thing - the CC has heaps better pose value - every man & his dog has an MX5. No head turning value at all.

I was worried about the delivery time, since I had an existing lease that was about to expire. The dealer was happy to put a "sunset" clause on the contract. If the car couldn't be delivered by a certain date, the deposit would be refunded in full. Maybe you could ask your dealer for something similar in case you change your mind in the quoted 6 months your CC may take to arrive

[Derek]

frosty,

changes /improvements in build quality are open to question. mines was built in november 2001 and was a complete lemon (sorry for insulting lemons).

although the fact that out of a replacement at a small cost or a full cash refund, i picked a replacement would suggest that it is still a good car to buy - white van will come for me later

derek

[nx]

You might want to read my earlier reply on a similar topic

On 2002-01-07 12:57, nx wrote:
My 206CC (2.0) replaced a MKII MX5 that I had for 2.5 years. My thoughts:

Speed - I love the 206 but to be fair the MX-5 (1800cc) felt quicker, in acceleration terms at least - it was the same bhp and it weighed less so its what you would expect.

Practicality - The day after I got the 206 4 of us (adults) went to the Lake District for the weekend - couldn't do that in the MX-5!

Wind Noise - I found this quite significant in the Mazda on the motorway - the 206 is a great improvement.

Security - Someone slashed the roof on my MX-5 but there was nothing in the car to steal and they made no attempt to steal the car itself?!?. A slashed roof is not a concern with the 206 - someone did set fire to it though when it was 2 weeks old!!!!

Economy - Both cars were driven equally hard and mpg is fairly similar at just over 30

Build - Only ever had one problem with the Mazda, they forgot to connect up the heated rear screen. The Mazda didn't have central locking or aircon or a cd player though. The 206 has these but I have also had the following probs - new aircon screen, leaks, door alignments, central locking, rattles.....

Overall - I'm glad I had the chance (no kids etc) to drive around in a 2 seater sports car but now I am happy with and prefer the 206 - you need to get the 2.0 though if you can!

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: nx on 2002-01-07 13:00 ]</font>